From the onset, this film is at a huge disadvantage with viewers like me. Like many foreign films from this era, it was dubbed into English for export and lacks subtitles (film snobs like me LOVE subtitles). In addition, hearing strange voices coming out of some of the characters is jarring. For example, Christopher Lee acted as Holmes--but it was NOT his voice in this movie. And folks my age will probably recognize Leon Askin (from "Hogan's Heroes") but not his strange voice! While the quality of the dubbing isn't bad, it is regrettable that they didn't use the original actors who spoke English to do their own dubbing.
The film is a rather routine Sherlock Holmes story that suffers from the casting. While I love Christopher Lee and looked forward to his interpretation of the character, it's really weird that the writer (Curt Siodmak) never thought much about the 6'5" Lee when he wrote the screenplay. Having him going in disguise and fooling Dr. Watson and his landlady was laughable--as a basketball player-sized man cannot easily fool anyone!! Yet, oddly, later in the film Holmes also went in disguise! If they were going to use a disguise, perhaps they should have just had him dress up like a tree!! The story is a bit clichéd as well since it involved Moriarty--Holmes' arch nemesis. However, to Holmes fans, this is odd, as Moriarty is a FREQUENT foil in films--yet he rarely appeared in the actual Conan Doyle stories and Holmes rarely thought Moriarty was behind a particular crime. However, I assumed they used Moriarty simply because the public had come to EXPECT the man due to the many Holmes films.
The story involves several disparate crimes--murders that seem to have no connection. One of them, however, isn't at all hard to figure out and I could easily figure out that the dead man was NOT Blackburn--yet the dumb policeman and Watson just assumed it was him. I kept thinking how most people in the theaters must have figured this one out as well--making the mystery not at all mysterious.
As for the rest of the film, it's not bad. It's nothing like the MARVELOUS Jeremy Brett films (which are clearly the best) but is nearly as good as the Arthur Wontner and Basil Rathbone films. It's reasonably engaging and worth seeing but nothing more.
The film is a rather routine Sherlock Holmes story that suffers from the casting. While I love Christopher Lee and looked forward to his interpretation of the character, it's really weird that the writer (Curt Siodmak) never thought much about the 6'5" Lee when he wrote the screenplay. Having him going in disguise and fooling Dr. Watson and his landlady was laughable--as a basketball player-sized man cannot easily fool anyone!! Yet, oddly, later in the film Holmes also went in disguise! If they were going to use a disguise, perhaps they should have just had him dress up like a tree!! The story is a bit clichéd as well since it involved Moriarty--Holmes' arch nemesis. However, to Holmes fans, this is odd, as Moriarty is a FREQUENT foil in films--yet he rarely appeared in the actual Conan Doyle stories and Holmes rarely thought Moriarty was behind a particular crime. However, I assumed they used Moriarty simply because the public had come to EXPECT the man due to the many Holmes films.
The story involves several disparate crimes--murders that seem to have no connection. One of them, however, isn't at all hard to figure out and I could easily figure out that the dead man was NOT Blackburn--yet the dumb policeman and Watson just assumed it was him. I kept thinking how most people in the theaters must have figured this one out as well--making the mystery not at all mysterious.
As for the rest of the film, it's not bad. It's nothing like the MARVELOUS Jeremy Brett films (which are clearly the best) but is nearly as good as the Arthur Wontner and Basil Rathbone films. It's reasonably engaging and worth seeing but nothing more.